Abstract
Preparing high-quality mathematics primary teachers is a priority of teacher education programs as they seek to fulfill professional standards. Programs have used a number of strategies to achieve these goals including developing criteria for program admission and graduation, and regulating future teachers’ opportunities to learn during their program and field experiences as they prepare to enter the classroom. Using data from the Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M), this chapter presents an investigation of the relationship between program outcomes as indicated by an assessment of mathematics content knowledge and mathematics pedagogy knowledge, and program standards as reported by program administrators. Factor analyses were used to create indices of program standards in key areas of emphasis. Linear regression models were estimated for four countries, including the United States, Russia, Poland, and Chinese Taipei. Our findings show that program selectivity is the most important strategy related to program outcomes in the Russian and U.S. programs. In addition to entry and exit criteria regulations, standards regulating opportunities to learn while in the program and during field experiences were related to program outcomes in Chinese Taipei and Poland.
TEDS-M and the study contained in this chapter were supported by funding provided by a grant from the National Science Foundation Award No. REC – 0514431 (M.T. Tatto, PI). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
With the exception of Poland for those teachers prepared to teach the early grades. The difference in scores between generalists and specialists in Poland provides important data concerning the relationship between standards and levels of knowledge attained by future primary teachers. Especially because those who are prepared as specialists in Poland attained very high scores comparable to future primary teachers in Chinese Taipei, the highest scoring country. The mathematical content knowledge assessment (MCK) and the mathematical pedagogical content assessment (MPCK) scores for future primary teachers are as follows: (a) lower primary up to grade 4 maximum in Poland (456.2/425), in the Russian Federation (535.5/511.9); (b) primary up to grade 6 maximum in Chinese Taipei (623.2/592.3), in the United States (517.5/543.6); (c) as primary specialists in Poland (614.2/574.8), in the United States (520/544.5) (Tatto et al., 2012).
- 4.
Notice that the variable SuppInstruction was omitted from the estimation of Model 6 in both tables because when included in the model, some cell combinations for this variable and two other of variables in the model were empty, which was a problem for model convergence.
References
Akiba, M., LeTendre, G., & Scribner, J. (2007). Teacher quality, opportunity gap, and national achievement in 46 countries. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 369–387.
Barber, M., & Mourshed, M. (2007). How the best performing school systems come out on top. London, UK: McKinsey & Co.
Brese, F., & Tatto, M. T. (Eds.). (2012a). User guide for the TEDS-M international database. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).
Brese, F., & Tatto, M. T. (Eds.). (2012b). User guide for the TEDS-M international database. Supplement 1. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).
Brophy, J. J., & Good, T. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328–375). New York, NY: MacMillan.
Casey, C., & Childs, R. (2011). Teacher education admission criteria as measure of preparedness for teaching. Canadian Journal of Education, 34(2), 3–20.
Council of the European Union. (2007, 12 December). Conclusions of the council and of the representatives of the governments of the member states, on improving the quality of teacher education. Official Journal of the European Union, C300/6–9.
Eurydice Network. (2006). Quality assurance in teacher education in Europe. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.
Feuer, M. J., Floden, R. E., Chudowsky, N., & Ahn, J. (2013). Evaluation of teacher preparation programs: Purpose, methods, and policy options. Washington, DC: National Academy of Education.
Grossman, P., Hammerness, K., & McDonald, M. (2009). Redefining teaching, re-imagining teacher education. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(2), 273–289.
Hammerness, K, Darling-Hammond, L, Bransford, J., with Berliner, D., Cochran-Smith, M. McDonald, M., & Zeichner K. (2005). How teachers learn and develop. In Darling-Hammond L., Bransford J. (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world (pp. 358–389). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Howell, D. C. (2013). Statistical methods for psychology (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning.
Ingersoll, R. (2007). A comparative study of teacher preparation and qualifications in six nations. CPRE research reports. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_researchreports/4
Ingvarson, L., Schwille, J., Tatto, M. T., Rowley, G., Peck, R., & Senk, S. (2013). An analysis of teacher education content, structure and quality assurance arrangements in TEDS-M countries. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: International Association for the Evaluation of Student Achievement.
Kennedy, M. (1999). The role of preservice teacher education. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession (pp. 54–85). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Levine, A. (2006). Educating school teachers. Washington, DC: The Education Schools Project.
Lumley, T. (2004). Analysis of complex survey samples. Journal of Statistical Software, 9, 1–19.
McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989). Generalized linear models (2nd ed.). London, UK: Chapman and Hall.
Mikitovics, A., & Crehan, K. D. (2002). Pre-professional skills test scores as college of education admission criteria. Journal of Educational Research, 95(4), 215–223.
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (2016). What teachers should know and be able to do. Arlington, VA: Author.
National Research Council. (2001). Testing teacher candidates: The role of licensure tests in improving teacher quality (Chapter 2). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.17226/10090
Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (pp. 169–186). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Tatto, M. T. (1996). Examining values and beliefs about teaching diverse students: Understanding the challenges for teacher education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18, 155–180.
Tatto, M. T. (2007). Reforming teaching globally. Oxford, UK: Symposium Books (Reprinted in 2009 Information Age Publishers).
Tatto, M. T., & Hordern, J. (2017). The configuration of teacher education as a professional field of practice: a comparative study of mathematics education. In J. Furlong & G. Whitty (Eds.), Knowledge and the study of education: an international exploration (Oxford comparative education series, pp. 255–274). Oxford, UK: Symposium Books.
Tatto, M. T., & Pippin, J. (2017). The quest for quality and the rise of accountability systems in teacher education. In J. D. Clandinin & J. Husu (Eds.), International handbook of research in teacher education. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Tatto, M. T., Schwille, J., Senk, S. L., Ingvarson, L., Rowley, G., Peck, R., Bankov, K., Rodriguez, M., & Reckase, M. (2012). Policy, practice, and readiness to teach primary and secondary mathematics in 17 countries: Findings from the IEA teacher education and development study in mathematics (TEDS-M). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: International Association for the Evaluation of Student Achievement.
Wang, A., Coleman, A., Coley, R., & Phelps, R. (2003). Preparing teachers around the world. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2011). Ambitious pedagogy by novice teachers. Teachers College Record, 113(7), 1311–1360.
Youngs, P., & Grogan, E. (2013). United States of America (USA). In I. J. Schwille, L. Ingvrason, & R. Holdgreve-Resendez (Eds.), TEDS-M encyclopedia (pp. 255–272). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
Zeichner, K. (2012). The turn once again toward practice-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(5), 376–382.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Program Selectivity and Monitoring
Variable name: | Entry_criteria | |
Description: | Admission criteria to regulate entry into the program | |
Procedure: | Factor analytic scale, standardized scores | |
Explained variance: | 18.22% | |
Source: | MIC002E | Demonstrated high level of achievement in mathematics as a characteristic or source of information that is used in selecting entering <future teachers> for this teacher preparation program |
| Â | MIC004 | With reference to national norms, how do <future teachers> entering this program rate with respect to their prior academic achievement? |
Variable name: | Exit_criteria | |
Description: | Graduation criteria to exit the program | |
Procedure: | Factor analytic scale, standardized scores | |
Explained variance: | 17.09% | |
Source: | MID012H | Write a defend a thesis as part of the institutional requirements that <future teachers> have to meet to successfully complete this program |
| Â | MID013A | Is there a document that prescribes competencies or performance standards that the graduates of this program are expected to meet? |
Governance
Original variable: MIC001 | Created variable: SelfGov |
Options: | Values: |
The policies are set by each institution without reference to any outside requirements. | 1 |
The policies are set by regional or national authorities. | 0 |
The policies are set by each institution, within guidelines set by regional or national authorities. | 0 |
There is no selection for this phase; all applicants are admitted. | 1 |
Program Content Standards
Variable name: | MPCK_StudLearning | |
Description: | Emphasis given to student learning as part of the goals of program requirements | |
Procedure: | Factor analytic scale, standardized scores | |
Explained variance: | 78.09% | |
Source: | In the program requirements, guidelines and other documentation, how much weight is given to each of the goals listed below? | |
MID011F | Knowledge about pupil learning in mathematics | |
MID011G | Knowing common pupil misunderstandings in mathematics | |
MID011H | Knowing how to build on pupils’ prior knowledge in mathematics | |
Variable name: | Managing_StudDiversity | |
Description: | Emphasis given to student diversity as part of the goals of program requirements | |
Procedure: | Factor analytic scale, standardized scores | |
Explained variance: | 47.79% | |
Source: | In the program requirements, guidelines and other documentation, how much weight is given to each of the goals listed below? | |
| Â | MID011J | Managing disruptive pupils |
| Â | MID011N | Conducting fair and valid summative assessments of pupil learning |
| Â | MID011Q | Specific strategies for teaching pupils with behavioral and emotional problems |
| Â | MID011R | Specific strategies and curriculum for teaching pupils with learning disabilities |
| Â | MID011S | Specific strategies and curriculum for teaching gifted pupils |
| Â | MID011T | Specific strategies and curriculum for teaching pupils from diverse cultural backgrounds |
| Â | MID011U | Accommodating the needs of pupils with physical disabilities in your classroom |
| Â | MID011V | Working with children from poor or disadvantaged backgrounds |
Program Field Experiences
Variable name: | WorkPupils | |
Description: | Tutoring individual pupils or working with small groups as part of the introductory field experience | |
Procedure: | Total score | |
Source: | How often are the following activities assigned as part of the introductory field experiences in this program? | |
MIE003C | Tutor individual pupils | |
MIE003D | Work with small groups of pupils | |
Variable name: | DataColl | |
Description: | Collect data for research projects as part of the introductory field experience | |
Procedure: | – | |
Source: | How often are the following activities assigned as part of the introductory field experiences in this program? | |
MIE003I | Collect data for research projects | |
Program Supervisors
Variable name: | SuppInstruction | |
Description: | Supervisors support in mathematics instruction (content and pedagogy) | |
Procedure: | Factor analytic scale, standardized scores | |
Explained variance: | 65.78% | |
Source: | Please indicate whether <supervisors/instructors/mentors> in the extended teaching practice are likely to assume each of the following responsibilities | |
MIE009A | The mathematics content of a lesson | |
MIE009B | The mathematics <pedagogy> of a lesson | |
MIE009J | Giving <future teachers> oral feedback on the adequacy of the mathematics content in their teaching | |
MIE009K | Giving <future teachers> oral feedback on their <pedagogical> approach to teaching mathematics | |
Variable name: | SuppWork_Students | |
Description: | Supervisors support in working with students | |
Procedure: | Factor analytic scale, standardized scores | |
Explained variance: | 53.46% | |
Source: | Please indicate whether <supervisors/instructors/mentors> in the extended teaching practice are likely to assume each of the following responsibilities | |
| Â | MIE009C | How to deal with pupils with learning problems |
| Â | MIE009D | How to deal with pupils with behavior problems |
| Â | MIE009G | Teaching a lesson to <primary> or <secondary> school pupils that a <future teacher> is expected to observe |
| Â | MIE009H | Taking charge of a class of <primary> or <secondary> school pupils to help a <future teacher> who has run into difficulties with the class |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Peralta, Y., Tatto, M.T. (2018). Preparing High Quality Mathematics Primary Teachers: Exploring Program Strategies and Standards in the United States, Russia, Poland, and Chinese Taipei. In: Tatto, M., Rodriguez, M., Smith, W., Reckase, M., Bankov, K. (eds) Exploring the Mathematical Education of Teachers Using TEDS-M Data. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92144-0_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92144-0_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-92143-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-92144-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)